Canada Case Law

Nicholas v. Attorney General (Canada)

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

After weighing the Descheneaux factors the court concluded Canada did not meet the heavy burden to justify a six‑month extension: although there has been legislative movement and ISC administrative steps, the legislative path and timetable remain uncertain, concrete harm to some BC residents would result from further delay, and ISC mitigation does not justify prolonging the suspension; accordingly the application to extend the suspension was dismissed and only the brief interim extension remains in effect.

Source excerpt

• Charter s.15 equality
• Declaration of invalidity
• Suspension of declaration
• Indian act s.6(1)
• Legislative remedy and implementation

Read case analysis

Touri c. Canada (Défense nationale)

Court

Federal Court of Appeal

The Court held the Commission acted within its statutory authority and procedural discretion, there was no reasonable apprehension of bias warranting recusal, no breach of procedural fairness or s.15 equality, and the Commission’s refusal to sustain the complaint was reasonable because the applicant failed to discharge the evidentiary burden by not presenting evidence or attending the hearing.

Source excerpt

• Procedural fairness
• Recusal and reasonable apprehension of bias
• Judicial review - reasonableness
• Charter s.15 equality
• Virtual hearings and mode of hearing
• Burden of proof under labour statute

Read case analysis

Bryzzhev v. University of British Columbia

Court

British Columbia Court of Appeal

Security for costs granted because the appeal has little prospect of success: the dispute is essentially academic and barred by s.69(2) of the University Act, the appellant's constitutional arguments were not raised below and are unlikely to succeed, and the appellant's impecuniosity does not outweigh the respondent's protection against unrecoverable costs.

Source excerpt

• Security for costs
• Academic jurisdiction of universities
• University act s.69(2) immunity
• Rule 9-5(1)(a) strike
• Charter s.15 equality

Read case analysis

R. v. T.M.

Court

Court of Appeal for Ontario

La Cour d’appel de l’Ontario a confirmé que les art. 42(5)(a) et 42(2)(p) de la LJCJ sont constitutionnels et a remplacé la peine par 18 mois de probation et 100 heures de travail communautaire.

• Youth sentencing
• Charter s.15 equality
• Charter s.7 liberty
• Deferred custody
• Youth criminal justice act s.42
• Youth-sentencing

Read case analysis

Shrieves v. British Columbia (Attorney General)

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

The court dismissed a petition challenging s. 5(8)(a) of DEER, holding the pre-disbursement application requirement was authorized, reasonable, and did not breach s. 15.

• Regulatory validity
• Disbursements
• Expert evidence limits
• Section 12.1 evidence act
• Charter s.15 equality
• S.96 constitution act challenge

Read case analysis

Rabbitskin v. Big River First Nation

Court

Federal Court

The Federal Court suspended a Charter challenge to a First Nation election residency rule for 12 months, dismissed mandamus, and awarded the applicant $4,000 costs.

• Charter s.15 equality
• Mandamus
• Specific performance
• Exhaustion of internal remedies
• Deference to indigenous self-government
• Charter-equality

Read case analysis

Ferris v. Canada (Attorney General)

Court

Federal Court

The Federal Court conditionally certified a class action alleging the Canada Student Loans Program discriminates against students with permanent disabilities by causing Excess Debt.

• Charter s.15 equality
• Disability discrimination
• Student loans
• Certification
• Aggregate damages
• Charter-s15-equality

Read case analysis

McNeilly v. The King

Court

Tax Court of Canada

The statutory definition of 'patient' in paragraph 118.2(2)(a) is limited to the person actually treated who is the taxpayer or the taxpayer's spouse, common‑law partner or qualifying dependant; services and medications provided to an unrelated egg donor or gestational surrogate in 2015 did not make the intended parent a 'patient' for METC purposes, so those expenses are not METC‑eligible; the appellant's s.15 Charter challenge failed because the exclusion applied equally to all taxpayers and was consistent with the purpose and scheme of the METC; confidentiality order sealing the surrogacy a…

Source excerpt

• Medical expense tax credit
• Surrogacy
• Egg donation
• Charter s.15 equality
• Confidentiality order
• Statutory interpretation

Read case analysis

Thomas v. Canada (Attorney General)

Court

Federal Court

Class certification granted in a Federal Court action alleging CAF mental-health stigma, systemic negligence, and Charter equality breaches; s.7 and fiduciary duty claims were not certified.

• Certification
• Jurisdiction to decline in favour of internal remedies
• Crown immunity (clpa s.9)
• Mental health stigmatization
• Negligence (systemic)
• Charter s.15 equality

Read case analysis

Lee v. British Columbia (Attorney General)

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

The court struck a Charter challenge to amendments to the Insurance (Vehicle) Act, holding the pleaded distinction was not an enumerated or analogous s. 15 ground.

• Charter s.15 equality
• Striking pleadings
• Statutory interpretation
• Motor vehicle negligence
• Charter-equality-rights
• Strike-pleadings

Read case analysis